Ok, so then what claim do the Palestinians have to a state? It is debatable whether the Palestinians ever even had a national self-consciousness until the 1920's when larger numbers of Jewish immigrants began arriving in Palestine. There was never a state of Palestine throughout history. The land was part of various empires based in the surrounding power centers such as Egypt and Turkey. Certainly there were people living on the land, and that should entitle them to live there, but why should anyone recognize these people's rights to a state of their own?
The fact they were living there when the Zionists turned up with their Biblical fantasies gives them more right to a state than the Jews had, or continue to have.
But I thought you said that if the claim is debatable that we shouldn't consider it legitimate?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
You are honestly ridiculous! No serious scholar debates whether the Jewish people originated in Israel. There is debate about whether the account of the ancient Jewish kingdom described in the later books of the bible is credible, or whether the bible's authors exaggerated. And the opinion you cited is that of one archeologist. I have talked to multiple archeologists who contest that claim based on current findings, as well as the fact that archeology is a discipline that doesn't close doors to more knowledge, meaning that just because evidence for something has yet to be found doesn't mean the evidence isn't still buried somewhere waiting to be found.
Seriously, fighting over history and who was the greater victim is pretty pointless. We should be concerned with what can bring about the best solution for everyone now..
When forced into a corner you resort to Psuedo-Biblical nonsense in an attempt to muddy the water and wriggle out of it.
And again if Israel isn't the Jewish homeland, which it factually is but leaving that aside for the moment, please tell me where my homeland is? Where did the Jewish people come from? Where was Judaism formed? If not Israel then where oh wise one?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
You are honestly ridiculous! No serious scholar debates whether the Jewish people originated in Israel. There is debate about whether the account of the ancient Jewish kingdom described in the later books of the bible is credible, or whether the bible's authors exaggerated. And the opinion you cited is that of one archeologist. I have talked to multiple archeologists who contest that claim based on current findings, as well as the fact that archeology is a discipline that doesn't close doors to more knowledge, meaning that just because evidence for something has yet to be found doesn't mean the evidence isn't still buried somewhere waiting to be found.
Seriously, fighting over history and who was the greater victim is pretty pointless. We should be concerned with what can bring about the best solution for everyone now..
I didn't say that I think this historical discussion is worthwhile. I simply have nothing better to do right now. This is a pointless debate because a) Israel exists, and b) you're simply wrong, as even the scholars you cited admit in the texts you quoted that Israel is the Jewish homeland, even if they argue that our society wasn't as awesome back then as we'd like to think.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
The fact they were living there when the Zionists turned up with their Biblical fantasies gives them more right to a state than the Jews had, or continue to have.
But I thought you said that if the claim is debatable that we shouldn't consider it legitimate?
A claim that attempts to usurp - ethnically cleanse - another people based on a spurious 2000 year old history is not legitimate.
You are honestly ridiculous! No serious scholar debates whether the Jewish people originated in Israel. There is debate about whether the account of the ancient Jewish kingdom described in the later books of the bible is credible, or whether the bible's authors exaggerated. And the opinion you cited is that of one archeologist. I have talked to multiple archeologists who contest that claim based on current findings, as well as the fact that archeology is a discipline that doesn't close doors to more knowledge, meaning that just because evidence for something has yet to be found doesn't mean the evidence isn't still buried somewhere waiting to be found.
Seriously, fighting over history and who was the greater victim is pretty pointless. We should be concerned with what can bring about the best solution for everyone now..
When forced into a corner you resort to Psuedo-Biblical nonsense in an attempt to muddy the water and wriggle out of it.
What pseudo-biblical nonsense? When have I quoted the bible, or even referenced it? I said explicitly in my first post on this topic that I don't believe god has anything to do with this, and I don't take the bible to be a literal historical account. Do you even read what I write, or are you just projecting opinions onto me so you can scream and rant about them. My argument is factual and historical. The Jewish people originated in Israel. This is a fact, supported by historical documentation and archeology. You have yet to prove otherwise, or provide me with an answer as to where you imagine the Jewish homeland is if not Israel. Everyone comes from somewhere, so the Jewish people had to start somewhere.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
And again if Israel isn't the Jewish homeland, which it factually is but leaving that aside for the moment, please tell me where my homeland is? Where did the Jewish people come from? Where was Judaism formed? If not Israel then where oh wise one?
My Ancestors on my Fathers side were Celts. My Ancestors on my Mothers side were Anglo-Saxon. So where's my 'Homeland'? Wales? Ireland? Denmark? Norway?
The fact they were living there when the Zionists turned up with their Biblical fantasies gives them more right to a state than the Jews had, or continue to have.
But I thought you said that if the claim is debatable that we shouldn't consider it legitimate?
A claim that attempts to usurp - ethnically cleanse - another people based on a spurious 2000 year old history is not legitimate.
Saying that a certain land is my homeland doesn't mean that it can't be someone else's homeland also. I believe that both the Jewish people and the Palestinians have legitimate claims to the land.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Stop evading the question! JEWISH NATIONAL HOMELAND, WHERE IS IT IF NOT ISRAEL? Not where does any particular person come from, where does the nation originate.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
And again if Israel isn't the Jewish homeland, which it factually is but leaving that aside for the moment, please tell me where my homeland is?
Where were you born? America?
Then your homeland is New York, U.S.A.
I asked about the national homeland of the Jewish people. Don't evade the question.
Michael Neumann: 'The Zionists and their camp followers did not come simply to "find a homeland," certainly not in the sense that Flanders is the homeland of the Flemish, or Lappland of the Lapps. They did not come simply to "make a life in Palestine." They did not come to "redeem a people". All this could have been done elsewhere, as was pointed out at the time, and much of it was being done elsewhere by individual Jewish immigrants to America and other countries. The Zionists, and therefore all who settled under their auspices, came to found a sovereign Jewish state.
'Zionism was from the start an ill-considered and menacing experiment in ethnic nationalism. Neither history nor religion could justify it. The Jews had no claim to Palestine and no right to build a state there. Their growing need for refuge may have provided some limited, inadequate, short-term moral sustenance for the Zionist project, but it could not render that project legitimate...'
Stop evading the question! JEWISH NATIONAL HOMELAND, WHERE IS IT IF NOT ISRAEL? Not where does any particular person come from, where does the nation originate.
The Jews never had a national homeland. It's just a Psuedo-Biblical/political fantasy.
Do you think the Nazis had a legitimate claim to all of Europe based on their self-serving genetic and historical/archeological research that suggested the Aryan race was entitled to conquer Europe at the expense of all other races?
Saying that a certain land is my homeland doesn't mean that it can't be someone else's homeland also. I believe that both the Jewish people and the Palestinians have legitimate claims to the land.
I agree. So then what are we arguing for?
You should be championing the cause of the Palestinians as vocally as the rest of us.
im an atheist of celtic descent. please tell me where my homeland is???
religion is so insidiously pervasive that it doesnt deserve the respect it so desparately covets.[/quote][/quote]
My Jewishness is a national trait based in history, culture, and ethnicity, and not primarily in religion. I leave it to you to decide where your homeland is, just as I would ask others to leave that decision to me rather than to preach arrogantly about what it is and is not acceptable for me to believe.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
My Jewishness is a national trait based in history, culture, and ethnicity, and not primarily in religion. I leave it to you to decide where your homeland is, just as I would ask others to leave that decision to me rather than to preach arrogantly about what it is and is not acceptable for me to believe.
Though I will take my hat of to you; despite the occasional remark that I'm ridiculous, and ignorant - you've kept the debate fairly civil, and you haven't chosen to play the antisemitism card.
My Jewishness is a national trait based in history, culture, and ethnicity, and not primarily in religion. I leave it to you to decide where your homeland is, just as I would ask others to leave that decision to me rather than to preach arrogantly about what it is and is not acceptable for me to believe.
Though I will take my hat of to you; despite the occasional remark that I'm ridiculous, and ignorant - you've kept the debate fairly civil, and you haven't chosen to play the antisemitism card.
Thank you. Though I sometimes feel that people mask anti-semitism by saying that they are simply anti-israel, I accept that this is not true of everyone, or even most people. And I certainly do feel that many people in the Jewish community deploy charges of anti-semitism carelessly in a way that erodes the seriousness of the charge. I try to speak carefully, which is probably why my posts tend to be so long, and I do not throw around claims of racism lightly. Not to rain on this, the most civil of our exchanges to date, but I'd like to ask that you try to be as careful with your language as I try to be with mine. I hope that you don't really believe that Israel can be equated to Nazi Germany, which is in my mind an even more heinous claim than saying that someone is anti-semitic. So I'd ask you to please stop using this language, because quite frankly I find it immensely insulting.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
My Jewishness is a national trait based in history, culture, and ethnicity, and not primarily in religion. I leave it to you to decide where your homeland is, just as I would ask others to leave that decision to me rather than to preach arrogantly about what it is and is not acceptable for me to believe.
how is your religousness separate from your culture and history as a jewish person??
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
My Jewishness is a national trait based in history, culture, and ethnicity, and not primarily in religion. I leave it to you to decide where your homeland is, just as I would ask others to leave that decision to me rather than to preach arrogantly about what it is and is not acceptable for me to believe.
how is your religousness separate from your culture and history as a jewish person??
Currently I do not keep the Sabbath, I don't keep kosher, I almost never go to services at synagogue except to socialize with people, or when my parents would really like me to go. My ideas about God are essentially that I have a gut feeling that there is such a thing as God, but I think it is absurd and presumptuous for anyone to think that they could ever know anything about the divine, so essentially I live my life as if I didn't believe in God. In short I am not really a religious person at this point in my life. At all. But I am very much culturally Jewish. I am a Jew. That is the single most important element of my identity. Does this answer your question?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
My Jewishness is a national trait based in history, culture, and ethnicity, and not primarily in religion. I leave it to you to decide where your homeland is, just as I would ask others to leave that decision to me rather than to preach arrogantly about what it is and is not acceptable for me to believe.
how is your religousness separate from your culture and history as a jewish person??
Currently I do not keep the Sabbath, I don't keep kosher, I almost never go to services at synagogue except to socialize with people, or when my parents would really like me to go. My ideas about God are essentially that I have a gut feeling that there is such a thing as God, but I think it is absurd and presumptuous for anyone to think that they could ever know anything about the divine, so essentially I live my life as if I didn't believe in God. In short I am not really a religious person at this point in my life. At all. But I am very much culturally Jewish. I am a Jew. That is the single most important element of my identity. Does this answer your question?
im not sure tbh.
for me in my limited capacity to separate the jewish race from the religion of judaism its an interesting thought to ponder. and one that is worth investigating further.
were you brought up in a religious or semi religious house???
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It's complicated. I grew up in a house that was very observant, so yeah we were religious, but it was also a very intellectual household that looked at religion with a critical eye. So, for example, I grew up in a house that readily accepted that the bible was written by people, probably by multiple people over a very long period of editing. So essentially I grew up in a house that was religious, but approached religion in a very open and non-dogmatic way. For me Judaism is one of many ways of accessing the divine, but more importantly religious practice plays a significant cultural role within Jewish communities, binding everyone together through shared ritual and custom. It preserves our history through texts and traditions and holidays. I mean basically Judaism isn't really like other religions because it isn't just a religion, it's an entire culture and heritage and history. This is going to be a flawed analogy, but it's like maybe if you took the Church of England, and mixed in English history and English folk customs and like all the little cultural things that bind the English together and make them recognize themselves as authentically English. I don't know, it's kind of hard to sum up your entire identity.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
I hope that you don't really believe that Israel can be equated to Nazi Germany, which is in my mind an even more heinous claim than saying that someone is anti-semitic. So I'd ask you to please stop using this language, because quite frankly I find it immensely insulting.
I didn't say Israel could be equated with Nazi Germany, but I did point out the fact that the Israeli's use similar propaganda tactics to those employed by the Nazis - but the same could be said of most, if not all, militaristic, expansionist states.
It's complicated. I grew up in a house that was very observant, so yeah we were religious, but it was also a very intellectual household that looked at religion with a critical eye. So, for example, I grew up in a house that readily accepted that the bible was written by people, probably by multiple people over a very long period of editing. So essentially I grew up in a house that was religious, but approached religion in a very open and non-dogmatic way. For me Judaism is one of many ways of accessing the divine, but more importantly religious practice plays a significant cultural role within Jewish communities, binding everyone together through shared ritual and custom. It preserves our history through texts and traditions and holidays. I mean basically Judaism isn't really like other religions because it isn't just a religion, it's an entire culture and heritage and history. This is going to be a flawed analogy, but it's like maybe if you took the Church of England, and mixed in English history and English folk customs and like all the little cultural things that bind the English together and make them recognize themselves as authentically English. I don't know, it's kind of hard to sum up your entire identity.
It's possible to be Jewish and maintain your Jewish identity whilst also supporting the rights of the Palestinians and opposing the Occupation. Noam Chomsky, and Norman Finkelstein - whose parents survived the Warsaw ghetto - are obvious examples.
It's complicated. I grew up in a house that was very observant, so yeah we were religious, but it was also a very intellectual household that looked at religion with a critical eye. So, for example, I grew up in a house that readily accepted that the bible was written by people, probably by multiple people over a very long period of editing. So essentially I grew up in a house that was religious, but approached religion in a very open and non-dogmatic way. For me Judaism is one of many ways of accessing the divine, but more importantly religious practice plays a significant cultural role within Jewish communities, binding everyone together through shared ritual and custom. It preserves our history through texts and traditions and holidays. I mean basically Judaism isn't really like other religions because it isn't just a religion, it's an entire culture and heritage and history. This is going to be a flawed analogy, but it's like maybe if you took the Church of England, and mixed in English history and English folk customs and like all the little cultural things that bind the English together and make them recognize themselves as authentically English. I don't know, it's kind of hard to sum up your entire identity.
It's possible to be Jewish and maintain your Jewish identity whilst also supporting the rights of the Palestinians and opposing the Occupation. Noam Chomsky, and Norman Finkelstein - whose parents survived the Warsaw ghetto - are obvious examples.
I'm not sure what your comment has to do with what you quoted at all. I also don't think that the connection of these two academics to the holocaust should be relevant in the least. They should be judged based on what they say, not on who their parents were. And it is also possible to be Jewish, support the rights of the Palestinians, oppose the occupation, and support Israel's rights, including the right to self-defense, as I do.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
And it is also possible to be Jewish, support the rights of the Palestinians, oppose the occupation, and support Israel's rights, including the right to self-defense, as I do.
On the subject of Israel's right to self-defense I'll chuck another quote at you, as I think it sums the subject up very well:
Michael Neumann
'It is sometimes alleged that complete withdrawal from the occupied territories is "impracticable" because the facts on the ground are too deeply entrenched: Israeli settlements are just too extensive and important to uproot. One can hardly take this seriously. If it was "practicable" for hundreds of thousands of stateless Palestinians to leave their homes, why is this impracticable for half as many Israeli citizens in far more comfortable and peaceful circumstances? Throughout modern history, from the waves of U.S immigration to the peaceful post-World War II population transfers, there have been far greater shifts than this movement of a few miles. In many cases, if the settlers prefer, they can simply return to their homes in the United States. "It's impracticable" seems here a stand-in for "Aw, gee, these towns are too nice to let the Arabs have them".
The significance of the withdrawal alternative is not that it represents a just solution. Arguably, justice would require much more than that - not only the abolition of Jewish sovereignty in Israel, but a full right of return, with compensation, for the Palestinians, and the eviction of Jewish inhabitants occupying Palestinian property. But the existence of the withdrawal alternative effectively completes the case against Israel. It's willful and pointless rejection of that alternative places Israel decisively in the wrong. In the first place, Israel has a right of self defense, but it does not apply in the Occupied Territories. If the U.S invaded Jamaica and dotted it with settlements, neither the settlers nor the armed forces could invoke any right to defend themselves against the Jamaicans, any more than a robber who invaded your house. So it is with the Israeli's in the Occupied Territories. Their right of self-defense is their right to the least violent defensive alternative. Since withdrawal (perhaps followed by fortifying their own 1948 border) is by far their best and least violent defense, that is all they have a right to do.'
In the first place, Israel has a right of self defense, but it does not apply in the Occupied Territories. If the U.S invaded Jamaica and dotted it with settlements, neither the settlers nor the armed forces could invoke any right to defend themselves against the Jamaicans, any more than a robber who invaded your house. So it is with the Israeli's in the Occupied Territories. Their right of self-defense is their right to the least violent defensive alternative. Since withdrawal (perhaps followed by fortifying their own 1948 border) is by far their best and least violent defense, that is all they have a right to do.'[/color]
This quote nails it, I think ... Assuming the idea is that Israel is "allowed" to defend itself up to and including pre-1967 borders.
It's complicated. I grew up in a house that was very observant, so yeah we were religious, but it was also a very intellectual household that looked at religion with a critical eye. So, for example, I grew up in a house that readily accepted that the bible was written by people, probably by multiple people over a very long period of editing. So essentially I grew up in a house that was religious, but approached religion in a very open and non-dogmatic way. For me Judaism is one of many ways of accessing the divine, but more importantly religious practice plays a significant cultural role within Jewish communities, binding everyone together through shared ritual and custom. It preserves our history through texts and traditions and holidays. I mean basically Judaism isn't really like other religions because it isn't just a religion, it's an entire culture and heritage and history. This is going to be a flawed analogy, but it's like maybe if you took the Church of England, and mixed in English history and English folk customs and like all the little cultural things that bind the English together and make them recognize themselves as authentically English. I don't know, it's kind of hard to sum up your entire identity.
thank you.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Comments
But I thought you said that if the claim is debatable that we shouldn't consider it legitimate?
No, you are ridiculous:
When forced into a corner you resort to Psuedo-Biblical nonsense in an attempt to muddy the water and wriggle out of it.
I didn't say that I think this historical discussion is worthwhile. I simply have nothing better to do right now. This is a pointless debate because a) Israel exists, and b) you're simply wrong, as even the scholars you cited admit in the texts you quoted that Israel is the Jewish homeland, even if they argue that our society wasn't as awesome back then as we'd like to think.
Where were you born? America?
Then your homeland is New York, U.S.A.
A claim that attempts to usurp - ethnically cleanse - another people based on a spurious 2000 year old history is not legitimate.
What pseudo-biblical nonsense? When have I quoted the bible, or even referenced it? I said explicitly in my first post on this topic that I don't believe god has anything to do with this, and I don't take the bible to be a literal historical account. Do you even read what I write, or are you just projecting opinions onto me so you can scream and rant about them. My argument is factual and historical. The Jewish people originated in Israel. This is a fact, supported by historical documentation and archeology. You have yet to prove otherwise, or provide me with an answer as to where you imagine the Jewish homeland is if not Israel. Everyone comes from somewhere, so the Jewish people had to start somewhere.
I asked about the national homeland of the Jewish people. Don't evade the question.
My Ancestors on my Fathers side were Celts. My Ancestors on my Mothers side were Anglo-Saxon. So where's my 'Homeland'? Wales? Ireland? Denmark? Norway?
My homeland is England.
Saying that a certain land is my homeland doesn't mean that it can't be someone else's homeland also. I believe that both the Jewish people and the Palestinians have legitimate claims to the land.
Michael Neumann:
'The Zionists and their camp followers did not come simply to "find a homeland," certainly not in the sense that Flanders is the homeland of the Flemish, or Lappland of the Lapps. They did not come simply to "make a life in Palestine." They did not come to "redeem a people". All this could have been done elsewhere, as was pointed out at the time, and much of it was being done elsewhere by individual Jewish immigrants to America and other countries. The Zionists, and therefore all who settled under their auspices, came to found a sovereign Jewish state.
'Zionism was from the start an ill-considered and menacing experiment in ethnic nationalism. Neither history nor religion could justify it. The Jews had no claim to Palestine and no right to build a state there. Their growing need for refuge may have provided some limited, inadequate, short-term moral sustenance for the Zionist project, but it could not render that project legitimate...'
im an atheist of celtic descent. please tell me where my homeland is???
religion is so insidiously pervasive that it doesnt deserve the respect it so desparately covets.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
The Jews never had a national homeland. It's just a Psuedo-Biblical/political fantasy.
Do you think the Nazis had a legitimate claim to all of Europe based on their self-serving genetic and historical/archeological research that suggested the Aryan race was entitled to conquer Europe at the expense of all other races?
I agree. So then what are we arguing for?
You should be championing the cause of the Palestinians as vocally as the rest of us.
End the occupation and see how that works out.
As John Lennon said 'Give Peace a chance'.
im an atheist of celtic descent. please tell me where my homeland is???
religion is so insidiously pervasive that it doesnt deserve the respect it so desparately covets.[/quote][/quote]
My Jewishness is a national trait based in history, culture, and ethnicity, and not primarily in religion. I leave it to you to decide where your homeland is, just as I would ask others to leave that decision to me rather than to preach arrogantly about what it is and is not acceptable for me to believe.
Though I will take my hat of to you; despite the occasional remark that I'm ridiculous, and ignorant - you've kept the debate fairly civil, and you haven't chosen to play the antisemitism card.
Thank you. Though I sometimes feel that people mask anti-semitism by saying that they are simply anti-israel, I accept that this is not true of everyone, or even most people. And I certainly do feel that many people in the Jewish community deploy charges of anti-semitism carelessly in a way that erodes the seriousness of the charge. I try to speak carefully, which is probably why my posts tend to be so long, and I do not throw around claims of racism lightly. Not to rain on this, the most civil of our exchanges to date, but I'd like to ask that you try to be as careful with your language as I try to be with mine. I hope that you don't really believe that Israel can be equated to Nazi Germany, which is in my mind an even more heinous claim than saying that someone is anti-semitic. So I'd ask you to please stop using this language, because quite frankly I find it immensely insulting.
how is your religousness separate from your culture and history as a jewish person??
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Currently I do not keep the Sabbath, I don't keep kosher, I almost never go to services at synagogue except to socialize with people, or when my parents would really like me to go. My ideas about God are essentially that I have a gut feeling that there is such a thing as God, but I think it is absurd and presumptuous for anyone to think that they could ever know anything about the divine, so essentially I live my life as if I didn't believe in God. In short I am not really a religious person at this point in my life. At all. But I am very much culturally Jewish. I am a Jew. That is the single most important element of my identity. Does this answer your question?
im not sure tbh.
for me in my limited capacity to separate the jewish race from the religion of judaism its an interesting thought to ponder. and one that is worth investigating further.
were you brought up in a religious or semi religious house???
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I didn't say Israel could be equated with Nazi Germany, but I did point out the fact that the Israeli's use similar propaganda tactics to those employed by the Nazis - but the same could be said of most, if not all, militaristic, expansionist states.
It's possible to be Jewish and maintain your Jewish identity whilst also supporting the rights of the Palestinians and opposing the Occupation. Noam Chomsky, and Norman Finkelstein - whose parents survived the Warsaw ghetto - are obvious examples.
I'm not sure what your comment has to do with what you quoted at all. I also don't think that the connection of these two academics to the holocaust should be relevant in the least. They should be judged based on what they say, not on who their parents were. And it is also possible to be Jewish, support the rights of the Palestinians, oppose the occupation, and support Israel's rights, including the right to self-defense, as I do.
On the subject of Israel's right to self-defense I'll chuck another quote at you, as I think it sums the subject up very well:
Michael Neumann
'It is sometimes alleged that complete withdrawal from the occupied territories is "impracticable" because the facts on the ground are too deeply entrenched: Israeli settlements are just too extensive and important to uproot. One can hardly take this seriously. If it was "practicable" for hundreds of thousands of stateless Palestinians to leave their homes, why is this impracticable for half as many Israeli citizens in far more comfortable and peaceful circumstances? Throughout modern history, from the waves of U.S immigration to the peaceful post-World War II population transfers, there have been far greater shifts than this movement of a few miles. In many cases, if the settlers prefer, they can simply return to their homes in the United States. "It's impracticable" seems here a stand-in for "Aw, gee, these towns are too nice to let the Arabs have them".
The significance of the withdrawal alternative is not that it represents a just solution. Arguably, justice would require much more than that - not only the abolition of Jewish sovereignty in Israel, but a full right of return, with compensation, for the Palestinians, and the eviction of Jewish inhabitants occupying Palestinian property. But the existence of the withdrawal alternative effectively completes the case against Israel. It's willful and pointless rejection of that alternative places Israel decisively in the wrong. In the first place, Israel has a right of self defense, but it does not apply in the Occupied Territories. If the U.S invaded Jamaica and dotted it with settlements, neither the settlers nor the armed forces could invoke any right to defend themselves against the Jamaicans, any more than a robber who invaded your house. So it is with the Israeli's in the Occupied Territories. Their right of self-defense is their right to the least violent defensive alternative. Since withdrawal (perhaps followed by fortifying their own 1948 border) is by far their best and least violent defense, that is all they have a right to do.'
if you get a chance, try and pick up her book, "Witness in Palestine".
http://www.encounterpoint.com/index.php
Trailer: http://www.encounterpoint.com/trailer/index.php
Torrent: http://btjunkie.org/torrent/Encounter-P ... 062b242652
This quote nails it, I think ... Assuming the idea is that Israel is "allowed" to defend itself up to and including pre-1967 borders.
thank you.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say